receiving-code-review
tessl i github:obra/superpowers --skill receiving-code-reviewUse when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
Validation
81%| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
Total | 13 / 16 Passed | |
Implementation
100%This is an excellent skill that demonstrates strong technical writing. It's concise yet comprehensive, provides actionable guidance with concrete examples, and has clear workflows with validation steps. The forbidden/allowed response patterns and real examples make the expected behavior unambiguous.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is lean and efficient, using structured patterns, tables, and examples without explaining concepts Claude already knows. Every section serves a purpose with no padding or unnecessary context. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance with specific patterns, real examples showing good vs bad responses, and clear decision trees. The GitHub API command is copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Clear sequential workflow with explicit validation checkpoints (READ→UNDERSTAND→VERIFY→EVALUATE→RESPOND→IMPLEMENT). Includes feedback loops for unclear items and explicit ordering for multi-item feedback. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections progressing from overview to specific scenarios. Content is appropriately structured within a single file given the skill's scope, with logical groupings and a summary table. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Activation
40%This description clearly identifies WHEN to use the skill (receiving code review feedback) but fails to explain WHAT the skill actually does. It focuses on philosophy and anti-patterns rather than concrete capabilities. The description would benefit from specifying actual actions like 'analyzes feedback validity', 'verifies suggestions against existing code', or 'identifies technically unsound recommendations'.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Analyzes code review feedback for technical validity, verifies suggestions against codebase context, identifies potentially harmful recommendations')
Expand trigger terms to include common variations like 'PR comments', 'review comments', 'suggested changes', 'reviewer suggestions'
Restructure to lead with capabilities before the 'Use when' clause to clearly answer 'what does this do'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description lacks concrete actions - it describes an attitude ('technical rigor and verification') and what NOT to do ('not performative agreement or blind implementation') but never specifies what the skill actually DOES (e.g., 'analyzes feedback validity', 'verifies suggestions against codebase'). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'when' is explicitly stated ('Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions'), but the 'what' is essentially missing - it describes the approach/philosophy but not the actual capabilities or actions the skill performs. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords like 'code review feedback', 'implementing suggestions', and 'technically questionable' that users might naturally mention. However, it misses common variations like 'PR comments', 'review comments', 'suggested changes', or 'reviewer feedback'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The focus on code review feedback provides some distinctiveness, but the vague capability description ('technical rigor and verification') could overlap with general code analysis or debugging skills. The niche is identifiable but not sharply defined. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.